• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech

what hp

  • Thread starter Thread starter palemall
  • Start date Start date Sep 8, 2006
P

palemall

New Member
Jul 30, 2006
18
0
0
Sep 8, 2006
#1
  • Sep 8, 2006
  • #1
what horsepower would i make on an na if i did a ranger header and roller setup also any thing else i can do to make power im shooting 130-150 and remotely streetable
 

Dr_EluSivE

Founding Member
Apr 24, 2002
2,155
0
56
Central Illinois
Sep 8, 2006
#2
  • Sep 8, 2006
  • #2
palemall said:
what horsepower would i make on an na if i did a ranger header and roller setup also any thing else i can do to make power im shooting 130-150 and remotely streetable
Click to expand...
what year car are you starting with? the 90-93's already have the roller cam, you might see 3-4hp gain with a header.. probably not much though.

Dr.
 
P

palemall

New Member
Jul 30, 2006
18
0
0
Sep 8, 2006
#3
  • Sep 8, 2006
  • #3
sorry 89
 

Shawneebear93

20+ Year Stangneter
May 4, 2004
518
17
49
Salisbury Twp, Allentown, PA
Sep 8, 2006
#4
  • Sep 8, 2006
  • #4
Ranger roller cam, ranger header, and an air intake may get you up 100ish, and that's not even at the wheels.
 

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
5,896
73
129
Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom
Sep 8, 2006
#5
  • Sep 8, 2006
  • #5
tealtiger93 said:
Ranger roller cam, ranger header, and an air intake may get you up 100ish, and that's not even at the wheels.
Click to expand...

A 12+ hp gain? Please, that's laughable.
 
S

Shinlee

New Member
Feb 10, 2006
146
0
0
Sep 9, 2006
#6
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #6
um, WHY the hell would you put a ranger roller cam into the car in the first place if you DIDNT expect a 12 hp gain just from the cam alone. sry, i work on bigger engines and such, and when i put cams in i am expecting a 25+ gain, but if the ranger cam cant even offer up 12 with the addition of the exhaust manifold/intake, wtf is the damn point of people doing the swap at all? i just dont get it.

my 105 stock car with intake/chip/exhaust/ranger header has 123 at crank right now, and i WAS thinking of a ranger cam, but your comment deters me. I'd just like to hear your reasoning behind your comment, and if i am offensive in anyway towards you, then i apoligize ahead of time.
 
B

BELL

Founding Member
Feb 21, 2002
722
0
0
California
Sep 9, 2006
#7
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #7
Shinlee said:
um, WHY the hell would you put a ranger roller cam into the car in the first place if you DIDNT expect a 12 hp gain just from the cam alone. sry, i work on bigger engines and such, and when i put cams in i am expecting a 25+ gain, but if the ranger cam cant even offer up 12 with the addition of the exhaust manifold/intake, wtf is the damn point of people doing the swap at all? i just dont get it.

my 105 stock car with intake/chip/exhaust/ranger header has 123 at crank right now, and i WAS thinking of a ranger cam, but your comment deters me. I'd just like to hear your reasoning behind your comment, and if i am offensive in anyway towards you, then i apoligize ahead of time.
Click to expand...


may i ask why you have a intake/chip/exhaust/ranger header on a 105 hp(stock) car anyway? 18hp from all that doesnt really make much sense either. however I'm used to working the same engines but with a turbo's.
 
S

Shinlee

New Member
Feb 10, 2006
146
0
0
Sep 9, 2006
#8
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #8
because its all a slow work in progress, as i said above, i want to do a cam swap, i am also planning on a full head port, all this is something i can do to the car, and not make me lose the vehicle for a month.

a turbo swap is just a bit outta my league atm, maybe next summer or something
 

Shawneebear93

20+ Year Stangneter
May 4, 2004
518
17
49
Salisbury Twp, Allentown, PA
Sep 9, 2006
#9
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #9
Red LX - I'm an eternal optomist.

Shinlee - If your car has 105 stock horsepower, it is a '91-93, no? If it is, it has a roller cam stock.
 
S

Shinlee

New Member
Feb 10, 2006
146
0
0
Sep 9, 2006
#10
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #10
thanks teal, i was under the impression a 97 ranger cam was still slightly more aggressive than mine.

well, guess that means i just have to buy a stage 2 cam then
 

Red_LX

I’m not much help unless you’re looking for ****!
Founding Member
Nov 29, 1999
5,896
73
129
Morgantown, WV...where couches meet their doom
Sep 9, 2006
#11
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #11
For some reason, over the years, after the 2.3 turbo people started retrofitting ranger cams to their engines (mostly for the reduced wear I guess), everyone else has decided that ranger cams are an upgrade. However they have the same grind as the stock cam, so you're just getting negligible gains from the reduced rolling resistance of the roller cam.

Even a fairly aggressive cam isn't worth much on an n/a 2.3L. Just the facts of life there.
 
B

BELL

Founding Member
Feb 21, 2002
722
0
0
California
Sep 9, 2006
#12
  • Sep 9, 2006
  • #12
red lx i would agree to a point. when i put the big valve head onto the 84 svo's curent engine i installed the roller due to spring pressure as it uses much larger springs (small block chevy if i remember i'll take pics from the one i just got back from the machine shop). spring pressure and more flow from the head (1.89 ex and 1.59 intake and full porting, ie regroud bwls on th head intake and exhaust ports) warrants using a roller style cam. Due to increased flow from the ( a known restriction) head and a roller style cam will allow a slightly higher rev limit, and a slight increase in hp. www.powerheads.com does excellent work BTW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 95 GT/Saleen Supercharged 331 install
  • from6to8
  • Mar 22, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
24
Views
713
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
G
Octane on the 5.0 Coyote
  • gray owl
  • May 17, 2026
  • 2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk
Replies
7
Views
121
2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk May 27, 2026
Bullitt347
6
Hey all,I’m putting together a 302 for my 1968 Mustang and wanted to post the combo + some questions to make sure I’m not missing crucial
  • 68_Disgustang
  • Feb 22, 2026
  • 1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk-
Replies
3
Views
673
1965 - 1973 Classic Mustangs -General/Talk- Feb 28, 2026
Noobz347
X
Free VE Table Corrections — Drop Your MSQ and a Datalog, I'll Do the Rest
  • X-cam34
  • Apr 12, 2026
  • Digital Self-tuning Forum
Replies
8
Views
274
Digital Self-tuning Forum May 21, 2026
X-cam34
X
K
3.8 T5 & Bellhousing to 1987 Lincoln 5.0
  • ks65stang
  • Mar 2, 2026
  • Other Auto Tech
Replies
3
Views
244
Other Auto Tech Mar 3, 2026
Noobz347
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?